BSNL, in its complaint, alleged that Indus Towers abused its position by denying access to its telecom sites (passive infrastructure), which was required to be shared in terms of the Infrastructure Sharing Agreement.
State-owned telecom company is engaged in the business of providing telecom services -- cellular mobile telephone services, across India except Delhi and Mumbai, while Indus Towers is in the business of providing passive infrastructure to telecom service providers and BPOs among others on a sharing basis.
For the case, the Commission considered "the market for provision of passive infrastructure services through telecom services in India" as the relevant one.
The Commission, in an order dated November 9, said that the "allegation of the informant (BSNL)levelled against the opposite party (Indus Towers), with regard to denial of access to sites, remains unsubstantiated".
Consequently, the regulator said,"no case within the provisions of Section 4 of the (Competition) Act has been made out ... Accordingly, the matter is ordered to be closed."
Section 4 of the Competition Act relates to abuse of dominant market position.
(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)